tv Washington Journal CSPAN September 24, 2011 7:00am-10:00am EDT
liability. good morning and welcome to the "washington journal" for september 24, a three-hour program today. starting with this, waivers for no child b -- no child left behind. president obama offered states the ability to set their own standards. we want to hear from you about the new role that states will now have in the education process. we want also get your thoughts on 10 years of no child left behind. we have divided the lines differently. the numbers are on the screen. a new role for states and the education process, that is by president obama, and announced that he made yesterday. after calling, you can reach out
electronically with e-mailed. if you want to reach out on twitter, and then you can also reach out on facebook get well. -- as well. as you make your comments this morning, here is a little bit from the "new york times." mr. obama invited states to reclaim the power for accountability. experts said it was a measure of house profoundly --
again, your thoughts this morning now that states have a new role in the education process by getting a waiver from the no child left behind, and we have divided the lines differently. so you a firm and a decatur, call the first number. if you are a parent, the second number. and the third number if you came up under no child left behind or you are currently still in school. chose to use's today's radio address which he submits the video version of well, offering states a waiver. here is what he had disappeared >> that goal was admirable but experience taught us that the law had some serious flaws hurting our children instead of helping them.
teachers are being forced to teach to the test all subjects like history and science are being squeezed out. in order to abide -- avoid being labeled failures, states lowered their standards and erased a the bottom. -- in a race to the bottom. but for years congress has failed to take action. now what will. our kids only get one shot at a decent education and they cannot afford to wait any longer. yesterday announced we will give states more flexibility for high standards in teaching and learning. it will let states and schools and teachers to come up with innovative ways to compete for the jobs of the future. >> if now that states have our role -- new role, your thoughts on that. you can go to tweeter -- twitter.
our first call up is from seattle, washington, a parent this morning, mike. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have three children and i wanted to take a look at what i believe president obama is putting forward, the correct thing. we have tried no child left behind. it is just not working. we decided to put our children into private schools now. one actually goes to a charter school. when you have that choice to take a look at -- in some communities, what public schools are offering, if you just talk about a public school, if you think of all public schools across america. but when you take a closer look at some of them, it is more the herding of children in the
classrooms, teaching to this standard test common and focusing in -- standard test, and no more individualism with understanding what that child is looking for, what that child needs individually, which i think believes -- creates entrepreneurs and scientists. host: when you pull your school's out of the public schools, what was not your satisfaction? caller: the overcrowding of classrooms, and that teachers really seemed to not really care -- i will use the word love. when i was growing up, it was more, good morning, here are the textiles, here is what you need to do. it is more than putting a textbook in front of them. host: we will hear from another
parent, joe in new york. caller: a learned that comment on the palestinian president's address at the united nations. host: we are trying to talk about the president's initiative for education. would you like to give something on that? caller: you do not want the american people to hear what he has to say. host: we move on the jacksonville, florida. corinne, apparent. -- a parent. caller: i'm concerned about the kids, they do nothing but teach to the test. they are labeling the schools as f schools. its ago by individual students. host: did you see that happening in florida? they had people transferring,
they were transferring into what as supposed to be an a or b school. host: to you know of your state will take the waiver? caller: that will take waivers. host: the president says he wants to maintain the academic standards, or least the ideas behind it. what you think your state needs to do to meet the standards? caller: just change it and go back told the way used to be, to teaching the students, be concerned about the students. a lot of kids say that our school is labeled f and i need to transfer out of it. we have overcrowded schools because so many parents are transferring their kids to the higher schools.
now they're getting ready to do a thing about some pre k kids, they want more pressure on the pre k teachers. host: from montana, and educated. bill, what you teach? caller: i teach teachers, is why i call an. i hear a lot of the about the effects of notes, left behind, it leaves out gifted students. the teacher in the classroom in montana as elsewhere are overcrowded. most teachers have to concentrate their attention on the lower echelon of students to bring them up to meet them stand ready to meet the standards of no child left behind. so the classroom is branded is
deficient. but they have to ignore the gifted students who would expel -- xl if they were given any attention, which they are not. host: if the states like montana takes the waiver, what the problem is that you saw, what you think it has to do since it is edge project -- responsible for education standards? caller: it would be nice to have more money to hire more teachers and overcome the overcrowding. that is not going to happen. but a teacher by applying her own standards and state and local standards can give some attention to gifted students so that they have a chance to excel as well as bringing the lower echelons students up to a minimal reading and math level. and science and other areas are ignored as a result of no child left behind. host: ddc that in a level of grades this goal were receiving?
caller: in our town, half the schools were deficient. many of the best schools in the city were deficient and that is ridiculous. it is a travesty, because some of the best teachers and the best schools were forced to teach in ways that they knew were not productive. host: a new effort for states with president obama offering waivers from no child left behind we're talking about that at the first 45 minutes this morning. gabriel is a student in washington, d.c. caller: i think the whole no child left behind is a policy implemented that has facilitated students being put through a process or a manufacturing camp to make them supposedly competitive for the future markets. but in so many ways, it has
been the downfall to students' success. i think i am a product of that as well. it was the lack of preparation for me applying to secondary colleges, and i had to go back and start with the fundamental skills which took a lot more time before i became proficient. host: such as? caller: math was one of the big ones. when it came to the other essential parts of the education system that you have to maintain, i was lacking. those were things that i had to build back up. i had to come to a better provision cnn. but the slippery slope with him giving it to the states is that
to maintain that they do not set up a standard that would lower it or make it even worse in certain outcomes of allowing schools to push through more students at a lower level of graduation equivalency to the mass public. host: again you can communicate with us by phone, twitter, and here's a comment from twitter. that is how she finishes off. you can send us your thoughts on twitter as well. lansing, mich. again, a parent to there, thank you for calling. caller: i am concerned here in michigan with the layoffs, the $300 million deficit, and they appointed two emergency
financial managers. there seems to be waste and fraud and abuse in accountability. i would like to see how no child left the chat -- no child left behind enforced in court and not left to the states. host: so your state is not up to the challenge? caller: that is correct. host: can you give us more specifics? caller: we have a lot of administrators, a superintendent, with the governor that has recently left office, she had controlled for years. they took out almost $1 billion but still we maintained a deficit. the should have file for
bankruptcy protection and we would not be in this situation. it does not make sense for kids to go to school and not have supplies and toilet paper. it was a bunch of nonsense. host: the ranking member of the education committee had this to say about obama's decision when it came to the waivers. president obama's efforts represent a dramatic shift -- again, waivers being offered to states to come up with their own standards, leaving no job left behind. that is the topic that we are taking this morning. if you've noticed, we have
divided the lines differently. we have a line for educators, a line for parents, and the line for students. picked the one on the screen as well as giving your thoughts on twitter, facebook, in the mail. virginia beach is next, crystal, a parent, good morning. crystal, are you there? crystal from virginia beach, good morning. falls,o to in this bird vt., cheryl, and educators. host: ims school counselor and have been working for 18 years and what i have seen -- i am a school counselor and i've been working for 18 years. what i have seen in these programs for kids, it has forced the school to buy extra curriculum that is really boring. kids do not like it.
it is not the 21st century model of learning. we have to buy expensive testing and spend time correcting data. the goal is to privatize education like the prisons, where there's a ceo that is profiting, and that teachers are left behind. they are the ones with the skills and knowledge. the tests are based on student performance, but it is really socioeconomic status and parental involvement that has a lot to do without children performance goals. whether they can read and whether people spend time with them. and there are issues that no child left behind did not address. host: with the current condition that vermont finds itself and, if states have more responsibility, what does that mean for them? caller: they can use their
resources the way that they want to resources -- the way that they want to and teachers can actually teach, focus on the student and what the student needs, and not be afraid that that test scores will be publicized and creator reaction were people have schools clothes and things like that. host: are there enough of those resources available? caller: if we redistribute them and have people that work directly with children rather than people sitting in offices looking at task force, i think that would be helpful. host: that was sheryl from vermont. "the washington post" takes a look at the markets and the week that was. all brutal week. worries about the global economy and fears about euro's
geithner, christine lifeguard, and also leaders of the european central bank and the german finance ministry, the bank of japan, and the people's bank of china also listed. that is indeed "washington post." another story over the continuing resolution that started in the house. with the house and the senate recessing for the jewish holidays, at least on the house side, and to get a sense of what happens next, a reporter who covers congress for the politico joins us. what does the next week in detail over the battle over the continuing resolution? guest: thank you for having me. as you know, early friday morning after midnight, the house passed a short-term funding bill that included spending cuts they were not
palatable for democrats. they voted to kill the bill, anything that the house sends over with offsets is dead on arrival. we do not know what the path to a compromise looks like right now. harry reid says that he has invited the republican leader mitch mcconnell and house speaker john boehner to participate in negotiations with him over the weekend. we are not sure how fruitful those talks will be. we're not sure about what progress will be made. both chambers were supposed to be on recess newsweek for rosh hashana. we do know and that -- the senate will be back in session. there will be a democratic funding bill they will keep spending levels at roughly the level that republicans have agreed to, but none of the spending cuts that republicans have demanded.
things are still up in the air. republicans feel confident that they can defeat harry reid's bill. again, a lot of questions still unanswered as to how this will all be resolved. host: saw the house is out this week, september 30 of comes and goes, what happens? guest: there is a lot of pressure for these guys to get something done. a lot talk about the shutdown, but very few people on capitol hill truly believe a shutdown will happen. all of the leaders in both parties have indicated they do not want to shut them. veterans like john mccain who been around a lot, he told me yesterday there is no conceivable way that the government which shut down. they will find a way to compromise. if recent history is an indication, they will find some kind of deal at the 11th power. i think you are reading from
the "washington post" headlines, remember that the markets are looking for stability and certainty right now, especially after the s&p downgraded the outlook for american bonds. they cannot push the country to the brink of a shutdown again and not face consequences back home in their district. host: when it comes to the compromise, where will it be found? where will the common ground between the two parties? guest: right now, the hang up is -- both sides say -- there is a lot that both sides agree on. cosi say that the spending levels should be set at of little more than $1 trillion, the level agreed to in the deal that raise the debt limit this past summer.
the impasse has to do with a tiny bit of the pile, a few billion dollars in disaster aid added to this funding bill. the hang up lies with the republicans -- and both republicans and democrats believe that fema funding needs to be in there. but the republicans want that money offset with spending cuts, specifically $$1.5 billion in clean energy loan programs. democrats say that that is a job killer. that is a nonstarter. there is broad agreement on the spending levels. it is really this fight over the offsets, keeping them apart at the moment. host: when it comes to the test
code on monday, does senator reid have the votes? guest: if u.s. democrats and senator reid, they are confident they can get something through. if you ask senator mcconnell, he says republicans are going to stand firm and reject this vote. senator reid needs to reach that 60-vote threshold, and a number of republicans need to come over and join him. there is an interesting strategy that reid is employing right now. an interesting exchange on the senate floor regarding the timing of the monday bowed. senator mcconnell is making the point to reid that we are all in town on friday, it in your bill will probably not pass, so let's get it over with and vote. reed says that we need a cooling
off period, let's take the weekend to think it over, and democrats think it will put extra pressure on the republicans from disaster- stricken states to support the senate bill. but the more pressing deadline under than september 30 when the funding for the government runs out his monday or tuesday when fema says its disaster funding will run out for things like a hurricane and flooding in wild fire victims. that seems to be what everyone is focusing on at the moment. host: if everything you've told us about this -- with everything you're told eskimo what has not gotten a lot of play when it comes to the specific story? guest: we of seen this movie before.
-- we have seen this movie before purred we had a threat of government shutdown in the spring, and just this past summer we saw another showdown over raising the debt ceiling that we're right down to the wire. we are in this situation again and congress tends to act when there is a deadline staring them in the face event -- face. with the cleanup funding deadline next week, it will be critical to see the response to that, and the friday deadline on september 30 at of when the government possibly could shut down, i think you are going to see congress spring into action. scott wong of the politico. thank you. back in the child left behind or
lease the passing of it with waivers being offered the states when it comes to education policy. minnesota, and jeremy, a student, good morning. caller: i am also apparent. i have the 4-year-old sought -- daughter and a 2-year-old son. i disagree with the whole note job left behind thing. what obama addressed the situation in a speech that he had, before there was no job left behind, it started off as different schools lowering their criteria for testing and stuff like this so that they can get things. that is blatantly saying that we really do not care what is going on with the students and in passing. we just care about how our school looks as far as the getting of funding.
i wanted to make clear that at the end of the day, all the problems that we're having in this country, education should be number one, because the children are our future. host: laurel, michigan, you're next. an educator, chris, good morning. you are on, go ahead. caller: interesting to listen to everybody this morning. they're quite accurate on their comments. one thing i wanted to say is that no job but behind has produced -- no child left behind has produced kids like we treat them like a piece of technology, we put information and then they spend it back, an ally that -- in a lot has to do
with meeting the standardized tests. it is said that teachers are so scrutinized in every move that we make is on your watch ally of somebody coming and we are not allowed to be creative anymore. host: and now they watched ally will be the states, though. caller: hopefully. the clothes you get the local management and government, the better off it will be. host: the think that michigan is up to the task? caller: yes, i have visited a couple of charter schools and private schools and a couple of public schools. it is funny that public schools to just as good as anybody else. we're managed differently. we do not get the pick to our students are.
-- to pick who are students are. charter schools get to experiment all the more. the management of the class was not anything better that -- from what i saw. but we're not allowed to be created. part of it is also the public's problem, too, everyone is fearful and they will not let their kids fail. the wright brothers flew their plan that thousand one times before they flew their plan for 12 seconds. host: more from president obama as he gives his reasons in the sections from yesterday. he talks about his concerns about american students falling behind the rest of the world. >> it is an undeniable fact that countries who out-educate us today will out-compete us tomorrow.
but today, students are sliding against their peers around the world. today our kids trail to many other countries in math, in science, and in region. -- and in reading. and that is not true just in inner-city schools, among poor kids. even among what are considered our better off suburban schools , we are lagging behind where we need to be. today as many as a quarter of our students are finishing high school. we have fallen to 16 as a person of children with a college degree. even though we know that jobs in the future will acquire more than a high-school diploma. host: apparent, good morning. caller: i want to take you back
to your past callers. i am a parent and i am an african-american. i vehemently disagree with a gentleman from michigan. they have a software program -- i have a software program that teaches math. because of the historical nature of slavery, and its impact psychologically on african- americans, typically we are taught about the american system, our values, and the like. we do not get very much cultural knowledge about our african roots of our ancestors. it gives whites of false sense of superiority.
host: in light of the president's decision yesterday? caller: i would like to get in and propose that he is on the right track. for african-americans particularly, there needs to be a cultural learning component to empower african children and their parents to start learning more about their own culture, the value system and the like, but then the american concept, but to give us a better sense. this is going on around the world. host: as he gives authority to the states, if you think will happen on that level? caller: no, because republicans and democrats make it about the bottom line and the ballot.
they may kids show up on the first day just to get that headcount and get tax per pupil funding. and they are treated like a number. host: little ferry, new jersey, on the educator line, ronald. caller: i am apprehensive about giving this authority to the states. the reason why is because so many municipalities -- i am in new jersey -- and there's so many municipalities in new jersey. you find with regard to public schools and charter in private schools, the decision makers often do not send their kids to public schools. you have people in the minister polities that decide budgets and
they decide policy with regard to where the children will attend, but their children go to private schools or charter schools. they are not affected by the decisions that they have the power to make. host: so they are disconnected. caller: totally disconnected. if the school budget comes up, and they decide how much money they're going to put into, say, certain programs, they would both the budget down, not because they say is not an effective program, but because the funds that would go into the program comes out of their pockets. it is money that they want to spend for their kids to go to private and charter schools. host: alice that different over the job left behind, where the authority came from the federal level?
caller: at the federal level, if you are at the state level, then i think the decision makers are going to take that money and let it how the money would best benefit their kids, who may be in private or charter schools. at the federal level, there would not be that sort of bias. host: two more minutes on this topic. call, e-mail, fort tweak your comments this morning. from the "baltimore sun" this morning.
the area as teachers and administrators, and move the whole focus of the children on a personal level, and of view on the actual children there. people who are involved directly with those children and the children are performing better as a whole across the nation's testing. he might be able to get those numbers back. there is a lot more accountability. host: this is from the "washington post."
westmont, ill., good morning. we hear from and other educators. -- and other educators. caller: this is not going to work. it is going back to what it has been for the last 40 years. i was proud of the public schools. they have a problem blaming teachers, but teachers are now babysitters, they cannot even be teachers anymore. we need parents more involved with the education of their children, which means more accountability and responsibility for their children learning.
the top administrators, if they are interested in education, they need to deal with primarily behavior, ok? that has a lot to do with the non-functioning and the fact the kids do not learn. they come on to school with of -- the coming to school with inappropriate behavior, sometimes even wasted, and the good kids trying to learn, we can i get to them because of all of the problems that we have. what we need to do is concentrate on culture, yes, but culture should be spelled out before proper behavior. that has to do with learning. when the kids are not listening, they are not learning. it is not the teachers are not teaching. and we would like to invite
people to schools where we have the biggest problems and have them try it for a couple of weeks. i guarantee they will come out with a different agenda. host: this week, the guest on our 2 q newsmakers" program is at lamar alexander. he is stepping down from republican leadership. he is talking about how he thinks the senate will vote on the president's jobs proposal. >> if is an issue that the president has been talking about for two weeks. will he get a vote? >> that is completely up to harry reid. he is the majority leader and he can schedule it any time that he wants. he has manufactured a crisis on disaster aid, which is a terrible fine for him to do pretty knows that the house will send us all the money that we need to approve for the rest of this year. and the federal appropriations committee has already approved all the money that the
president's disaster debt correlation has approved, and we will approve more if needed. digg could have been this week that we voted on the jobs bill if senator reid had gotten it to the floor. host: lots that tomorrow at 10:00 and again it 6:00 on c- span. the topic is waivers from the top left behind. a parent, good morning. caller: the woman that just but before me, the african american teacher, she hit than nail on the head. 25% of our children are not graduating. primarily in our inner cities, and it really goes back to the family and homes. they have to teach them and have to have more authority in school. private, parochial schools
demand more and they get more. our school system has fallen apart for the teachers' unions have really, really they collected the children, but it stems from proper upbringing. respect, they have to learn respect and take care of themselves, behave themselves like young gentleman in young women like when i went to school 30 years ago. those things of all run amok. she has hit the nail on the head. it all has to start there. host: one more call from a parent and crystal beach, virginia. caller: i got disconnected earlier. i wanted to say that as a parent and student that came up underneath the standards of learning, i remember one of the most overwhelming feelings that have was doing my actual test and knowing that my teacher
really did not teach me. i did not have a mother that new about algebra, and now have one class left in college, and i realized that a lot of the reason the kids are not doing it well under the standards of learning of notes top left behind is primarily because we've taken the joy and the self-esteem out of the child. when you see other kids doing good in something but you are not good at it, a lot of time children get discouraged. they throw their hands out. the one thing i want to say is that we need to focus on the individual child and not be focused on a group of children. also, look at this ratio, i might be good english, someone else might be good in math. the person good at math might need to be an engineer, and i might need to be a public teacher. i think it put too much emphasis
on the child being good everything instead of let the child be good at what they are good at. it would make for a lot of innovation and am so glad that he got rid of this program. host: in our next segment, we look at the deficit reduction plan from the president. curtis dubay of the heritage foundation will be with us for that discussion. i want to tell you about our studentcam 2012 project. it is our competition now under way for 2012, and this competition is open to middle and high school students, grades 6-12. this year's theme is the constitution and new. here are the requirements. the video that you produce must be five minutes to 8 minutes in length.
my show more than one point of view and it also has to include c-span programming. to get this video altogether following the rules, and you can find out more on the website, submitted by january 20. a grand prize winner will get $5,000 and other prizes totaling $50,000 will be offered third if you want more information, here is the website -- studentcam.org. that will show you how to submitted. you can start that process. the deadline to make these videos and get them into us is on january 20. you may have seen stories in the paper yesterday about solyndra executives testifying on capitol hill. you may have also heard the story that the key witnesses, they offered to take the fifth when it comes to questioning predicted a sense of what was happening in the movement, here's the interchange from yesterday.
>> with every document in piece of information that you submitted to the department of energy and the white house office of the management and budget rent and congress accurate and complete to the best of your knowledge? >> i have tremendous respect for the subcommittee and the important oversight role that it plays. as much as i wish to be able to answer the member's questions, i have been enticed by my counsel that it is the better course for me to assert my constitutional right to decline to answer questions under the fifth amendment. while i hope to have an opportunity to assist in the future, under advice of my attorney i must respectfully declined to answer any questions put forth by the committee. >> mr. silver. >> hundred buys of my counsel, i must invoke the privilege to invoke the fifth amendment to the constitution and i respectfully decline to answer any questions put to be by this
committee and subcommittee. i have great respect for the oversight role the congress place in our democracy. i trust that members had similar respect for the fifth amendment. [guitar music continues] >> spend this weekend in charlotte, north carolina with book tv and american history tv. throughout the weekend, the history and literary life from the site of the 2012 democratic convention. on book tv on c-span2, charlotte's banking industry. karen cox on "dreaming of dixie -- how the south was created in the american popular culture." we also visit the park road
bookstore to learn about the relationship with the independent bookstores and publishers. and on american history tv on c-span3, tour 11th president james polk's birthplace, a discussion with charles jones, the civil rights leader on his part in the 1960's lunch counter sit-ins, and visit the reed gold mine where gold was first discovered in america. book tv and american history tv in charlotte, north carolina next weekend on c-span2 and c- span3. >> you do not play politics at that time of national crisis, and you never, ever take politics with people's jobs. >> with the british house of commons in recess, and your party conferences are under way. watch it nicolet -- nick cleeg this sunday.
and ed miliband and david cameron later in the week. >> "washington journal" continues. host: this is curtis dubay with the heritage foundation, a senior policy analysis. we invited him on to talk about the president's deficit plan when it comes to the topic of new revenues. welcome. we have heard a lot about the but that rule. -- the buffett rule. what does it mean to the public and what does it mean to you? guest: it is broadly on defined in the president's plan. someone making more than $1 million a year should make -- should pay more in his taxes than a middle income family. it is not very well defined. but the congressional budget
office, the average effective tax rate is over 30% for the top income earners. a middle-income family pays less than 15%. so if we take that from the congressional budget office, and it likely means that the president is going to take the capital gains tax rate. by now it is 16%. income tax rates are higher. he might be talking about trying to wave the capital gains rate. we're not 100% sure. it might be revealed later on. but those are the two questions. host: if it is obscure from your perspective, then why bring it up at all? guest: politesse, because the
president is going to class warfare route. -- politics, because the president is going the class warfare route. he is trying to be the protector of the middle class in this way. but it does not really jibe very well because it is already in effect, the buffet will. if he wants to raise capital gains to 20%, he is contradicting his own role. he could be talking about going from the 15% rate that we have now all the way to the 40% tax rate. that would be 164% increase. we're hoping to find out more. the administration refuses to define it further. it leaves it open to interpretation. we do not know a whole lot at this point.
it is more about politics than sound policy. host: when do president bush's tax rate stop? guest: january 2013, we go back. host: what is the likelihood that an extension will occur? guest: the president has said that he wants to keep all lower rates in effect. so there is agreement there on both sides. the only rates that would go up or that top two rates. they would go back up to 36% and 39.5% if the president is successful. if the president wins the election, he will of 1 two elections on that policy. if the republican wins, then we will see an extension. i think we will have broader tax reform, and so it's not -- it
might all be a moot point. but that is on the horizon. host: if the extension does not happen, what is the potential for more revenue for the federal coffers? guest: the president estimates raising the top to rates will bring in $160 billion every two years. host: and what about paying for those taxes? guest: there is a two-part plan. last week rolled out the jobs part, and this week the deficit reduction part. he is putting together a tax policy that will deter job creation. this all falls on jobs created. -- on job creators. he said he is going to tax the job creators and and give them a
disincentive for adding new workers. host: one of the things that the group said is that revenue increases are achieved by eliminating the special preferences or broadening the base, reducing the debt portions in the tax system. get rid of these tax expenditure raises revenues to reduce the deficit and shrink the size and scope of government. revenues to the treasury are increase but it is more like cutting spending and raising taxes. guest: i agree with most of that. but at disagree that it reduces the size of the federal government. if you increase taxes, broadening the base and taking away tax expenditures, or loopholes, you are increasing taxes. higher taxes means bigger government. we are actually increasing it. at heritage, we are for fixing
the task code so that it does not have -- that tax code so it does not encourage inefficiency like it does now. but we do not want to raise taxes spurred we want their revenue to lower rates and encourage investment. host: curtis dubay is our guest. the telephone numbers are on the screen. you can e-mail and twitter. when it comes this tax rate, what is the optimal way of changing the tax code as you see it? guest: everyone is focused on the top rates. i think that is probably his place. we should look at the proper tax
base. did the base right, and then we can worry about the raids. what basically have is you have washed in and picking winners and losers for the tax code. -- washington picking winners and losers for the tax code. ethanol is a great example. we have a tax expenditures that encourage the production of ethanol, with washington favoring methanol over all other energies out there. there may be more promising alternatives out there but they do not get the same amount of resources because of this decision. host: the first call is from new york on our democrats line. caller: caller: i think this man is drinking the republicans boule.
i know many wealthy people here in manhattan. some of the highest income earners anywhere to be found in the world bank and job creators are really nothing more -- his term for job creators is nothing more than tax dodgers. they have the laws in their favor. people do not create jobs because of taxes. people create jobs because they want to make money. this whole republican myth about job creators is just that. it is a myth. i really wish that the democrats would stand up and get up in their face and call it for what it is. they are tax dodgers, and that is their new income stream. guest: these are job creators
because when you are talking about and, above $200,000 for individuals or above $250,000 for families, you are talking about investors and businesses in tom. they provide the startup capital for enterprises to get ideas off the ground. a lot of the income is above that level is business in come. they can hire other workers. a study was put out by the treasury department that said the businesses that pay their taxes and the ones that have employees, 95% of them will get hit by the president's tax cuts. when we are talking about raising taxes on the rich, we are talking about directly taxing jobs and job creators. one thing gets a little misplays in this debate it. i am not defending the rich.
i really do not care how much warmer buffett gets taxed. what i care about is the next warren buffett. the next bill gates, steve jobs, the next michael del. the person who will create the next great product and make our lives better with a new product and hire more people. when we raise tax rates, we make it less likely that that entrepreneur will get started and get going and achieve that success. i am more concerned about more americans reaching the success that the rich now enjoy. when you raise the capital gains rate which is the president might be talking about, you are making that hurdle rate much higher. host: $866 billion was expected to allow president bush's tax cuts to expire. $410 billion to reduce tax deductions for those earning
more than $250,000. $52 billion repeal on an accounting method. west virginia, go ahead please. our republican line. caller: i would just like to say that i think it is a myth that you guys talk about raising taxes on the rich because they already pay more than their fair share. probably 56% of the people in the united states pay no taxes, 45% of them live off of handouts that the democrats give them. i know people right now have gone on unemployment and they will not work because their growth and has two kids and they live in subsidized apartments, phone bills, and food stamps.
why would they need to work? guest: i think the caller hit on one thing, that the tax code is already highly skewed toward higher earners. 50% are not paying, 50% are paying federal income taxes. the people who are paying taxes are paying taxes at other levels. but the federal income tax, the tax that funds most of the activities, they are not paying anything into that. the top 1% of income earners pay about 40% of all federal income taxes. the top 10% pay 70% of the federal income tax. the bottom 50% paid less than 3% of the federal income tax burden. host: georgetown, mass., go ahead. caller: thanks for having me on.
i want to bring up a couple of points here. warren buffett -- we are not worried about how much he is going to get taxed because he is so successful. what are the conditions under warren buffett? he was being taxed more when he created berkshire hathaway. historically, he was attacked a lot more in the creation of his unbelievable wealth. in these last 10 years, where we have cut the tax rates for the upper income and everyone else i suppose as well, -- i mean, let's just look at what happened. look at the mess that we are in. to say that taxing the higher earners, the so-called job creators -- if we tax them more, they are not going to hire more people.
demand is what makes people hire more people. demand. that is the only thing. if you put the incentives in place and you give tax breaks and benefits to companies that hire people, so you make the incentive -- it is more favorable to hire someone to keep your cash then pay taxes on it. guest: i think the caller was referring to president obama's plan to give tax breaks to companies that hire new workers. when a company hires a new worker, they hire them because they assume that worker will increase their profitability over the long haul. the president is offering tax breaks that will last for one year, and they are a couple thousand dollars. that does nothing to change the calculations of that employer in terms of does that worker increase the profitability.
so the jobs plan will not create many jobs because it does not do anything to affect the long-term outlook for the employer. host: how would the gas suggest paying that off with revenue? guest: right now, we are below the level because of the recession. once the economy starts growing at a faster rate, tax earners will return back to the historical levels which is about 18.5% of gdp. we do not need to be raising taxes to get growth back up. if we raise taxes, we are then growing the size of government. higher taxes always mean bigger government. host: so the economy is growing in your opinion? guest: no, i said once it starts growing again.
the national budget office says that under their estimates of what economic growth will be, we will be back to that level by 2017. if the economy picks up steam much quicker, we will get there much faster. host: to go back to the $410 billion that would reduce tax deductions, what do those deductions? guest: he did not single out any specific deductions. he says that income earners that pay 33% and 35% under his plan -- they are not going to take the full advantage of the deductions. they are going to be tapped if they pay the 28% tax rate. what is interesting is this will create disparity between businesses that pay their taxes to the individual income tax and those who pay the corporate income tax because corporate
income taxpayers can deduct their costs. on the individual side, business deductions will be limited. you have this two-tier system with the big corporations will have an advantage over the companies that -- host: what determines if someone files under corporate or individual? guest: partnerships, general partnerships, limited partnerships -- it depends on the kind of business and what the owners want to do. host: florida, you are next. john is on the republican line. caller: good morning. this whole tax issue of who pays or how much they pay -- it is a distraction. we need to study in the history and see why we have an income tax. this country did not have an income tax until 1913.
you have the big money people, the big bankers. i think there were three reasons. number one was controlled. it leads to big government. the average middle-class person pays roughly 40% in taxes and fees for the state, local, and federal. if we had no income tax in this country, the average middle- class person could go out and buy a brand-new car every two or three years or a house every 15 years. we are forced to go to the bankers now to borrow the money to buy these things. guest: i would dispute that, that the middle income family pays 40% in income taxes. they pay less than 15% in federal taxes. they certainly pay other state
and local taxes, but federal taxes are generally the lion share of the general tax burden. host: this offer of twitter -- -- off of twitter -- guest: fairness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. it means something to everybody. it is not what president obama considers a fair tax code or the members of congress consider a fair tax code. what i am worried about is having a tax code that is fair and equitable to everyone while at the same time promoting economic growth so everyone can enjoy prosperity. right now, our tax code falls short of that. host: herman cain is promoting a flat tax. without work? guest: his plan -- would that
work? guest: his plan is not a true flat tax. we need tax reform. tax reform that takes our tax code from the current system and moved closer to a consumption tax that does not tax savings and investment. yes, we are very supportive of tax reform, but there are a lot of different models out there that can work. there are all sorts of different models out there and they achieved basically the same economic ends. i am skeptical of any system that has both an income tax and a consumption tax. i do not trust congress that has both at their disposal. i would much rather that in tax income rather than give them both a chance to tax our consumption and our income. host: our guest is curtis dubay from the heritage foundation.
there is the web site if you want to take a look at it yourself. new york, you are up next. caller: thank you for c-span. i have a two-fold situation. number one, most of our manufacturing has been sent overseas. over stimulus that we were supposed to have in the last four or five years has not really come about. to stimulate economic growth, you have to have something you are producing in this country. as far as taxes and the taxing or raising the tax base for the 1% since they have control of all of this capital -- most of the capital is brought in from what they have done overseas -- and why isn't is possible that
the president's increase shouldn't be feasible? thank you. guest: did you catch the last part? when you raise taxes on investors and businesses, you are doing two things. which is raise marginal tax rates. first, you are taking resources out of their hands and putting it into the hands of congress. would you rather have the 535 members of congress deciding how to invest that money, or would you rather have the private market deciding what to do with that money? the next point is when you raise the marginal tax rates, you are reducing incentives to engage in risky behavior. adding new workers for a business is risky. when you raise that tax rate, it
is a more disincentive for them to engage in this behavior is. host: detroit, michigan, good morning. ed is on our republican blind. i am a tea party member. what i believe is what they do is they take money from demonstrably productive enterprises and individuals and their free-market, and they transfer that wealth through a ways full middleman too politically connected individuals and enterprises. we have seen politically connected interests and income in this country become more polarized. the middle-class has suffered. would you support that? guest: you put a lot out there. what we need right now is we
need tax reform. our current tax code -- if you want to talk about fairness -- it is unfair to everyone. it is an impediment. is driving business is overseas and jobs overseas as well. we need a broad tax reform that will fix that and make the u.s. and much more attractive place for economic growth and investment. host: so the third point was this accounting measure with some type of $52 billion of revenue potential. what is that? guest: it is an arcane accounting method. it was put in there in the 1990's and was to protect a manufacturers against inflation basically. it is a way that they can deduct inventory from their income. the president picked that out -- it is very telling on his tax policy. there is no good reason to
repeal it except that it raises money. the president wants to raise taxes. he has treated the tax code largely like a grab bag or a menu in ways that he can raise revenue. in this latest iteration, his latest plan, he picked a bunch of the shelf. it is interesting because the president's philosophy economically is to increase demand. he wants people to go out and spend money. one of the industries hit the hardest will be the retail industry. of the prices in the stores would go up. which would of course deter us from consuming. this happens a lot with the president's tax policy and bank they contradict his other stated goals. host: was the alternative minimum tax a part of this discussion? guest: no.
his policy on alternative tax is to patch it, but it does not hit middle income families and keep that permanently. the only difference is he wants to raise other taxes to offset the revenue lost. we do not look at it as a revenue loss. host: how would you weigh what the president has proposed with the current work that the joint committee on deficit-reduction that is currently working? does this proposal work against their efforts? guest: it was designed for that. their goal is to reduce the deficit by $1.50 trillion. they have to come up with a plan by thanksgiving. it is interesting because it to break down with the president is presenting him he says it is $4 trillion in deficit reduction. if you break it down, it is $1.50 trillion in deficit reduction that comes from tax increases. host: what does that mean?
guest: if he got his plans, all revenue increases. he would be very happy with. getting tax increases through congress -- i do not think it is going to happen. house republicans have been very adamant that they are not going to increase taxes. if that is what it comes down to, and if there are no tax increases, the president ends up in a tough spot because any deficit reductions at this point is good even though we need much more than $1.50 trillion. we have to start somewhere and keep the ball movement. host: the next call is from south carolina. are independent line, go ahead. caller: how are you guys doing? we have been least three examples of when taxes are lowered, the rich actually pay more. you have the bush tax cuts, the
reagan tax cut, and the cuts that were made by and the mellon bank in the 1920's. the rich actually end up paying more. mr. dubay, if he could speak to this, he really needs to talk about tax cuts, decreasing government spending, regulation, and the federal debt. host: could you expand your argument on the dropping of tax rates means that more that make more pay more? caller: when you drop the tax rates on the rich, it allows them to keep more of their money. contrary to popular opinion, business owners do make decisions as to what factories to build and what businesses to expand based upon taxes because when the tax rates are higher,
they do not get to keep as much as their money as they would if the tax rates are lowered. they do make decisions based upon how much risk. weighing that risk involves taxes. guest: i think the caller is right that we have seen over the last 30 years since we started reducing marginal tax rates -- the top tax rate in 1980 was 70%. right now it is 35%. we have seen the share of the federal income tax burden shift further to the top. the top 1% pay 40% of the federal income tax burden. that has increased since the 2001-2003 bush tax cuts went into place. that is why we are in favor of
lower marginal rates not because it shifts the burden to the top but it provides greater incentives for economic growth. host: of albany, n.y., good morning. caller: i just want to tell this guy that i have been in business for 38 years. i have had a construction business, owned a gas station, and have run a catering business all at the same time. there is only one reason i have ever hired a new employee. it is because i have had to work. in other words, in my opinion, ok, everything comes down to demand. i am not a multimillionaire or anything. i have always treated my employees well and pay them well. truthfully, the whole basis is demand. it is not trickle-down economics. that is one of the biggest fallacies in the world. i have been a republican all my life until recently because i
really have my doubts about you people now. guest: i am not arguing that the tax code is the be all end all. what i am saying is that the tax code is one of the elements of economic growth, one of the impediments to businesses, and is a major factor but is not the only one that we consider. host: are you still there? what do you think about proposals you have heard coming from this administration, specifically in job creation and how to deal with paying off our debt especially for those who are wealthier? caller: lowercase say, i pay the 39.6% -- like i say, i pay the 39.6% under president clinton.
when i had the demand with 68 employees, i made more money overall in my pocket because of the demand. host: thank you. guest: we would love to return to the economic growth that we had in the 1990's. right now, unfortunately, we are not experiencing that kind of growth. if we return to their growth, we will be better off. are we more likely to get that kind of growth if we raise taxes or keep texas where they stand? host: illinois, thank you for waiting. caller: thank you. i do not think this man really understands how the situation works. 1, the president just makes proposals. he does not make the laws. thsi congress does. and they are not doing anything.
people that are losing their jobs or do not have jobs really do not care about the debt or the deficit. what they want to do is go back to work. you cannot go back to work if they are not hiring. my question is why is it that the heritage foundation people are so bent on taxes and not getting people back to work? if you do not have revenue, you cannot create jobs. you need that revenue. close the loopholes. that will create a lot of money. thank you. guest: we are very concerned with putting people back to work, we just do not think that the jobs are created out of washington. if it did, we would be creating a lot of jobs right now because washington spend a lot of money in the last year. one of the major factors is the uncertainty that is coming out
of washington. the president is constantly talking about raising taxes. and non of regulations being pushed out of all sorts of federal agencies -- a mountain of regulations being pushed out of all sorts of federal agencies to de. you added to that the anti- business rhetoric that the president has. look at the corporate jet issue he brought up two months ago. an obscure tax provision off the shelf -- he picked an obscure shelfsitioprovision off the purely for political reasons. the jet industry was going about its business. than the president singles them out for an attack for political reasons. that has a chilling effect on the entire community because if you are another industry going about its business, you are
concerned that the president will single you out for political gain. there are things that washington can do. there are also things that washington is not responsible for. when it comes to uncertainty, that is something washington should be focused on to provide a more stable environment. host: of the republicans running for president economically, when it comes to the economy, who has the best proposals? guest: i have not looked in depth at the different plans that the candidates are putting out. what we are looking for is we are looking at -- we are looking for plants from the presidential level to address the most pressing concerns that we have in washington today, which are the dead and the deficit. we would want to see reform programs like social security and medicare. this is what we need to get the
country back on track. host: washington, the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to ask your guest a question if he has done any research around self-employed individuals. i wanted to quickly comment on the last caller that we need the loopholes closed. everybody agrees with. to get the democratic party to come to the center on tax reform would have to be a party that admits class warfare does not work. if i take that out of their argument, i cannot see what they actually stand for. we can never expect tax reform until we have a conservative president and congress and senate. three days ago from texas, there was a great idea. he was angry because that date democrats were so anti-business.
republicans in business, fire all of your democrats. let them stand on their own. i think that economic civil war would solve everything. i and self-employed. i have been all my life. i do not understand how anybody could advocate raising taxes on somebody like myself who makes $100,000 a year. isn't the president raises my taxes, i look at -- if the president raises my taxes, [unintelligible] guest: obviously, raising taxes on any one is not the route to gros. we agree that we need tax reform, but the reason why it is stagnant right now is because we have two different conceptions. conservatives like at the
heritage foundation believed tax reform is improving the efficiency of the tax code. i do not call them loopholes because these are things that congress has put into the tax code for families and businesses to reduce their tax burdens. they are not loopholes, but that is a common vernacular. they are put there by congress. we agreed that we need to eliminate most of these. when we do that, we want to reduce marginal tax rates. the other side does not see it that way. they see the tax code as a way to reduce -- the president is talking about raising taxes on the rich. the stings are contradictory. -- those things are contradictory. host: we have time for one more call. that is from a houston, texas. caller: can you hear me? i wanted to ask the gentlemen
how are we to pay for the war if we did not maintain the tax status that we had? we had a whole department of homeland security that was created under the last president. how in the world -- you say that we cannot blow up on texas when the economy is bad, and yet we can lower our taxes when we have additional spending. guest: you can pick out any kind of spending that occurred in the last 10 years and say we cannot have reduced taxes because we are increasing spending in this area of the budget. the fact remains that spending is on an unsustainable path going forward. there are just too many baby boomers coming into the system. congress has promised to many benefits to them for current
workers to continue paying for those benefits. so we need to reduce spending. if we are increasing taxes, we are talking about increasing the size of government. we are going to have ever- increasing taxes until the economy just cannot bear the burden of the high tax burden that we end up with. it all starts with getting spending under control especially in and out among programs. host: curtis dubay from the heritage foundation joining us. thank you very much. in our last segment at 9:15, we are going to be talking about genetically modified food and special regulations that deals specifically with. if you watche c-span, you probably know that on the weekends, c-span2 and c-span3 turned into "book tv" and
american history tv. at this time, we turn our attention to charlotte, n.c., this week. is hosted by our time warner cable partner and the content vehicles. they visited several locations especially since it will host the 2012 national democratic convention. here is charlotte mayor talking about the economic boost that the convention is already having on the city. >> i think the economic impact is going to be tremendous. we have a building that is right outside my window that has been stuck in neutral for the last six years.
now because of the convention is coming, there is a flurry of activity to get that building finished. it is something that is happening as a result of the convention. there are scores of other construction projects that are happening. at&t has launched a network conversion inner-city because we are hosting the convention, an investment that is putting people to work right now. we expect the direct economic impact to be somewhere around $150 million to $200 million. i think the longer-term impact will be greater than that because for the first time in the history of this city when you say charlotte, people are going to know what you are talking about. >> can you tell our audience and a little bit about one of the the s that has come oup in convention process? can you explain your reaction to
it? >> i can only explain the part i know about, and that is that we went after this convention without any -- you cannot hide the fact that north carolina is a right to work state. everyone knew that going into it. we are very thankful and excited to host the convention, and we also know that there are constituencies in the democratic party that have an interest in being part of the convention. we are going to work those issues out as we go along. that is the way it is. >> where do the issues stand right now? >> there have not been contracts led on any projects at this point related to construction or the trades or anything. as we go through the process, we will continue working with the dnc and other players to make those issues work for everyone.
host: just a sampling of the work of our local content vehicle. three of them travel the country. if you want to find out more about charlotte, our content vehicles, and the tour, go to our website. we continue on our discussion, as does agree looking at north carolina as it shakes up politically as a battleground state in 2012. joining us, our guest david parker, chairman of the north carolina democratic party. thank you for joining us this morning. the president won north carolina by 1400 votes or so back in 2000 in the last campaign. where does he stand now as far as how he is rated to possibly take the state again? guest: key is in very good shape. his approval ratings are good --
he is in very good shape. his approval ratings are good. we have no idea who the president is going to be challenged by. the polls show him in very good shape to take the state again. it is going to be close but i firmly believe he will carry north carolina and again. host: if you say it is going to be close, why are those two things happening? guest: i think everyone is concerned about the economy. the jobs act he has been touting i think it is starting to get traction and a starting to make a difference. people are frustrated. they want this economic recovery to hustle. we all know people who are out of work or are under-employed. we all want things to be better. in large part, congress has sat around for two years and has done nothing. this president has proposed
legislation. and congress is mostly fiddle faddling around and talking about arcane tax policy instead of putting americans back to work. it is just a pure horserace. all of our polling indicates that he would be the republican front runners in north carolina. north carolina, as you know, went for obama in 2008 and it had been a long time since north carolina went for a democrat. host: he visited several times, the last time talking about jobs. how many other businesses from key industry officials do you have in north carolina? guest: i did not quite hear you. host: besides the president, are there other officials did in north carolina? guest: the vice president was in in raleigh last week.
i do not know the trouble schedule of the other officials, but i am sure they are coming in to look. north carolina is an example of what can happen in this country when you have a strong dynamic state and a strong dynamic city like charlotte that is taking the lemons of this economy and adding water and sugar and trying to come up with something that is palatable. host: do these visits frequently indicate concerns about the state overall as their ability to win it? guest: of course they are concerned. we are in the south. the south has been invested with jesse helms' style republicans and unfortunately influenced by conservative thinking of the kock brothers and the heritage foundation.
part of what the president is doing and worked so well in 2008 is simply bringing the message to north carolina of what democrats stand for and what democrats can do. i think you heard this from president obama's speech. democrats firmly believe that we are all connected, that the wealthy in this country make more money when the middle class is empowered by having jobs. demand -- one of the last callers talked about how demand drives his business. he was a small businessman. and it does. if you enable the middle class to buy more products, then sam walton's sons are going to make more money. that is what the jobs act is all about. in north carolina, it will put some 13,000 educators, fire fighters, and policemen back to
work that have been fired by the general assembly, and something like 19,000 construction workers back to work doing infrastructure projects that are very badly needed. it is a $1,300 per person average family savings on taxes because of where our average income is. so this is meaningful. $100 a family makes a difference. host: our guest joins us from charlotte, n.c. he is david parker, chairman of the north carolina democratic party, and he is our guest until 9:15 to talk about his state as the host of the convention. if you want to ask a question, here is how you can do so penn ban.
also, we have set a signed a side -- we have set a line aside for people from north carolina. you can also send us an e-mail or tweet. mr. parker, the democratic national convention has an advertisement targeting charlotte and raleigh. we are going to play it for our viewers and we will get your comments on it as well after we watched it. >> the next election is 14 months away, and the people who hired us to work for them -- they do not have the luxury of waiting 14 months. some of them are living week to week, paycheck to paycheck, even day to day. they need help and they need it now. members of congress, it is time for us to meet our responsibilities. >> the democratic national committee is responsible for the content of this advertisement.
host: what is your reaction? guest: key is absolutely right. we cannot wait 14 months. we need jobs now, folks out there believing in this economy, believing in this country. one of the biggest problems that we face in business, and i am a businessman -- i have a small business and also and a partner in several other businesses, one of which is a pretty good size. consumer confidence is critically important. i think this small middle-class tax cut which may seem small to the wealthy folks is going to have a meaningful impact on people. $100 a month is a lot of money in north carolina. host: the president talks about -- how does that affect you as a business person yourself? guest: well, the question is going to be how quickly will
there be demand for products? the quicker there is demand for products, the quicker i can ramp up and try to hire folks. it is pretty simple. it is a chicken and egg thing however. if i feel that the economy is going to bounce back, one of the businesses that i am involved in which has to do with flooring for houses will start ramping up in anticipation of demand for housing going up. of course, we look at housing starts very carefully. we are very hopeful that these middle-class tax cuts are going to have an impact. of course, you get these nice credit for being able to hire people as well. host: the first call for you comes from winston-salem, n.c. you are on with david parker, chairman of the north carolina democratic party. caller: good morning.
we have a democratic governor who has been in office for three years now. we really turned out the vote for him here, but i feel like he has really led down the lower income people of this state. there are no jobs being created. i recently bought a camera, and i have so many pictures of low income people standing on the streets during work hours with nothing to do. what is his plan to help north carolina to get back to work and therefore better the country? guest: well, it is a good question. number one, i would love to see some of those pictures. you can go on to our website and send me an e-mail. i would like to see those. we are always looking for good content.
in terms of a jobs plan, the republican jobs plan -- the republicans control the general assembly, both the house and the state senate. the plan has to do with tax cuts that already havee profitable businesses. for them to put an amendment on the ballot that will not create a job, that will not help any of those folks who are standing on the streets of winston-salem hoping to find work and probably feeling increasing despair -- i look at the jobs back from this president, and i see that he runs into the same problem with the republican house in particular and the cloture rules in the senate preventing any meaningful legislation from going through their. what we are hearing from the
heritage foundation and the other mouthpieces of the republican party is they do not like the tax reform. they do not want people making more than $250,000 to be paying the same tax rate that was under the clinton administration. i am sensitive to what is happening with working-class folks. working-class folks are a part of the middle-class. it enables them to buy more products with this $1,300 reduction in taxes. hopefully, it will stimulate demand and that will filter through out the entire economy. a lot of those folks standing on the streets or trying to find work are members of families that have somebody who is under employed who can take advantage of that tax cut. again, we are all in this together. we are all connected. i am as connected to warren
buffett as that person standing on the streets there in winston- salem. i do not know if that answers your question directly, because the republicans are in control of the general assembly. what we can do is put out good ideas and not waste time on silly notions that will not create jobs or increase anybody's quality of life. we can try to focus on doing something meaningful in north carolina. the on and, rate is right around 10%. shockingly -- the unemployment rate is right around 10%. it went up early last quarter because the republicans led some many educators and state employees go all in order to save one penny on the sales tax. the polls indicate that people were willing to pay $1.80 for soft drinks in order to have teachers in the classroom and
firefighters outside fighting fires and cops on the streets. but that the unemployment rate actually dropped because the republican reduction in government will implement. that trickle-down to school boards. and a lot of education cuts that came from the north carolina general assembly. there are things we can report pretty easily by looking at state personnel records and what they report as far as what implement is concerned. what we do not see is a decrease in the employment in our county's. -- counties. state schools are having to look at layoffs because of the reduction in funding for their overall programs. so the general assembly cutting public education really to the bone, cutting community colleges, cutting our state
universities, it is just been devastating. these are folks that are middle- class people. the middle class is anybody making less than $206,000 a year which is an awful lot of money. a lot of my friends are not making anywhere close to that money now. what the president is doing hopefully will help on the ground. host: florida, the republican line. you are on with david parker. caller: i have two things that i want to talk about. number one, he said that the president wants this jobs bill passed away. he took a listening tour before he could come up with this jobs bill. then he went to massachusetts
for a vacation before he could come up with this jobs bill. the last i heard, it had not even been given to the house of representatives to vote on. it is still on his desk as of last wednesday or thursday. host: what is your question? caller: he talks about the big hurry, but he does not seem to be in 1. mr. parker thinks republicans should be in a big hurry but not mr. obama. host: we will leave it there. guest: i think both the administration and congress need to be in a big hurry. the republican strategy seems to be to keep this country in economic doldrums so people are panicked and worried. they make personal accusations against the present in order to keep him a one-term president. we need to pass this jobs bill
right away. it will take votes in congress from republicans if this jobs bill fails. it will be because republicans stop it. if this jobs bill passes, it is because the republicans decided that the economy was more important than politics. we have looked at a lot of things happening in the state of florida particularly in the real-estate industry. part of my business has to do with real-estate. i pay close attention to what is happening in florida because unfortunately it was a bellwether for the rest of the country. we need to get florida construction workers back to work. there are a bunch of high-rise condominiums and subsidized housing that has not been completed. we need to get back to the serious business of getting all those workers back to work. we need to pass this right away. i do not want to go into
personal attacks, but this president takes vacations periodically. nothing like his predecessor who spent most of his presidency on call at his ranch. this is a time to focus on the truth of the message, and the truth of the message is this jobs act needs to be passed right away. we have a republican congressmen in the state who is adamantly opposed to passing the jobs act and that results in the under implement of some 13,000 teachers that the republicans fired out of the general assembly, policeman, and firefighters. it is so ironic to me. we just celebrated heroism of firefighters in new york city. 10 years ago with 9/11. the republican party embraced firefighters and policemen wholeheartedly. now when those folks are on the short end of the stick, there is
no help from the republican party ast al. the reality is teachers and firefighters and police men need to be back to work. construction workers need to get back to work. what we are asking is people that make more than $250,000, a quarter of a million dollars, the people who make more than that amount of money ought to pay their fair share just like they did under the clinton administration. if they do so, i think this economy will perk back up, and those wealthy folks will make more money. i appreciate the color printer questioned. now is not the time to dillydally. he is pitching this -- he is going to pitch until the republican party finally wakes up and puts the economy above petty politics and get on with the business of this country.
host: north carolina, the democrats lined. go ahead. caller: i was calling because i watched the president this week. hello? host: go ahead. caller: i also wanted to say that i agree with the president. i went to praised governor purdue because she is doing a very good job. she vetoed some of the things that the republicans wanted to put through. it is time that the people of north carolina and of the u.s. wheat up and realize that the republican party has been taken over by the koch brothers and whoever else that we do not know of. host: lloyd, go ahead. caller: i have a question --
host: go ahead. you are on the there. go ahead. caller: what i would like to know is this jobs bill that the president has going right now, in there it says that everybody has to be paid according to [unintelligible] you know, it is common sense -- if you can hire two people for $15 an hour instead of one person for $30 an hour, you can hire more people. this is thanks to the democrats to appease the unions. you are talking about planned politics. that is a perfect example of planned politics. host: how would you react?
guest: that will not affect us in stateville very much. the caller does make a good point. the game is to hire as many people as possible and try to get them working. because some employers have had access to capital, not very many. obviously, in stateville, we have seen a tremendous decline in manufacturing in textiles and furniture. we just lost in manufacturing of medical supplies which was a big blow to our community. but we have got to get people back to work. the way to do that is to stimulate demand. folks will find individual items to pick out in this jobs at. no legislation is perfect. we all fall short of the mark.
the gist of what we are going after is what is important. this is not a time to nit pick. we need to pass this jobs act right away. the president is not of the opinion -- i cannot speak for the president because i am a lowly party chair. the president believes that this jobs act needs to be passed pretty much in total. there are some details that are open for discussion, but the argument about the davis bacon and the impact in stateville is minimal. minute because the prevailing wage in stateville is so low -- mainly because the prevailing wage in stateville is so low. it increases in worker productivity so much that they do not have to hire people. that is a factor as our economy shifts from manufacturing into
more service-related businesses. unfortunately, we are going to see that prevailing wage dropped because we do not pay waitresses' as much as we pay people who are involved in plastic injection molding. is a different economy. host: our independent line. caller: i am a reactionary by political standards, but i have three comments i would like to make. we have a national debt of $14.30 trillion. if we took $100 million a day and paid it, it would take 289 years to pay off the national debt. now, in so far as the economy, i think we are burnt toast. i believe china, india, japan, russia, and brazil are the top five economic countries in the world as we speak today. i do not even know if america is
in the next. number two, i am not concerned about the 9.2 million unemployed or the 15 million foreclosures or the debt ceiling as it was raised a couple of weeks ago. my concern is about losing the reserve currency of the world, the usd. number three, i would like everybody who is listening to this to call the supreme court and check case number10-446 to eliminate the imposter that now occupies the white house. host: i will let you respond, if you wish. guest: i will react as best i can. people have been betting against this country. naysayers back in the 1980's said japan would overtake the u.s. and that they were the way of the future. we stood proud and continued to
be the economic engine of the world. is china prospering? yes. only on the perimeter. there are vast spaces of interior china that have not seen this economic prosperity. when a caller from florida says that he is not concerned about unemployment, then i would point him back to john donne's famous devotional from the 1600's, "we are all part of the main. when you hear the bell tolling, ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee." i do not know how he is getting right. i care about him and everyone in this country because we are all connected. this is not the time to throw up a wall and pretend the rest of
the country is not in trouble. it is time to reach our to our brothers and sisters all across this country whether they are in florida, north carolina, california, and understand we are all in this together. we, the people, make this country strong. it it sounds like i'm on a soap box, so be it. i believe the democratic party is about the middle class. when the middle class is empowered, chirred book contributions go up. that is something we do not talk about. the churches in this country are working hard to make sure that contributions go into those churches. so many of the churches in our country are doing a wonderful job going out into communities and making a difference in people's lives. that is what the democratic party is about.
host: north carolina voted for carter and then after a hiatus obama. we will vote for another democrat in another 40 years. next caller, good morning. caller: good morning, mr. parker. i want to thank you for having this on the head. number one, we definitely need to go after the middle-income people. it did two things. it made the wealthy get off of their money and it created jobs. without a strong middle class, this country will never survive. in michigan, we have a 10% unemployment rate. it is basically because of cars, foreign trade policies that we agreed to come and we need to start taking care of our own here in the united states.
the person who said a president obama needed be criticized for taking a vacation, our legislature took two months off in the summertime. thank you c-span and thank you to mr. parker. guest: i want to respond, if i may. i love the advertising campaign for detroit because it shows that this country has muscle. the state of michigan has muscle. the american car industry is coming back. if you look at what we did bailing out gm. look of the number of people who kept their jobs. gm is coming back and they are profitable. the cars look good, look powerful, muscular, american. i am proud of what this country did to keep gm going. hopefully it will have an impact on michigan.
host: roxburgh, n.c. caller: when bill clinton passed nafta, the industry's went to mexico. on top of that, there are mexicans all over the place imported so all of the black people who do not have a job now, i work with a lot of them and the ones i work with, some of them have two or three jobs. the democrats want to keep people for so they can always have that vote. they do not care about the american people. they did not care about the middle class. they care about that vote. it is disgusting, reprehensible, and it has to stop. thank you. host: mr. parker? guest: i will take that as a question as to why democrats tried to enact policies that are favorable to people down on their lots.
the fact of the matter is we are all in this together. whether there is a demand for jobs and people will still that demand for jobs, then it is good to get people employed. there is no pattern of discrimination here. we hear this from republicans often and the fact of the matter is that the poor do not vote. a lot of the things the caller just talked about, undocumented aliens, they are not citizens and do not vote. the attack is inappropriate. one of the things that happened in north carolina, unfortunately, is that republican party decided that the object of hatred now is not only hispanics and other persons of color but that it is convenient and easy to believe gay people. the does not do anything to increase the quality of life.
it does absolutely nothing to improve quality of life or the ability of people to find work in this country. making people the object of hatred, this is really anti- american. we passed a bill of rights in 1789 and we demand it so that the rights of the minority would never have to do with bullying majority. right now, what we're seeing are bullies like this caller who have this taste in their mouth, this hatred. those people need to respect the rights of the minority, whether they are a minority in religion, sexual orientation, or in the way of thinking. again. we are all connected in this. i am as connected to that man as i am to the host of this show or
the caller from michigan. we are all in this together. that is why we need to pass this jobs act right away which is what this democratic convention is all about. it is the first democratic convention -- convention that has been funded exclusively by the people. we're not taking money from or larges, pac's, corporations. this convention in charlotte is about raising money for the people it is believed the people's convention. i would be remiss in not saying that people who want to volunteer for this convention and be a part of this dialogue, charlottein2012.com, and volunteer. get involved. it is an exciting time. host: do they need to be a
carolinian? guest: absolutely not. last i heard, there were literally thousands of people that have volunteered and we will be using some 8000- 10,000 volunteers. it will be a fantastic week in september, 2012. host: cleveland, ohio, republican line. mike, go ahead. caller: how are you? guest: doing good. caller: i have two things. the jobs plan looks like a great plan. looking at the country overall, we have this deficit, as far as jobs and not hiring. here in ohio, we have a 9.1% and we are matching the country.
you have to go through a temporary agency to apply for these jobs. they do not have a budget, but these agencies that would be hiring, they are holding your social security and everything to make it looked like you have a say, but you do not. they call every week to see if you have an assignment. they do not, but guess what? you still do not have a job. they can have you listed as working as far as the national the opposite that we have in ohio. they say we really do, but we do not. guest: there is an under- employment problem in this country that is on reported
which is why we have to get consumer confidence back up. if you build up the middle class and increase demand for products, then you're going to see a rise in employment. cleveland like some of the other cities in ohio are very tight in with the automotive industry, shipping, cars, but they are tied in with the muscular part of this american economy. we have to get people back to work. that is one reason the president went to ohio to talk about this job fact that have to be passed right away. we use the term right of way repeatedly and it starts to sound trite. the fact of the matter is we cannot wait 14 months. the people of new mexico cannot
wait 14 months. but we need to pass this jobs act right away. under-reporting is a problem, but that is something that is detailed, but the fact of the matter is we have to have more jobs. we have to have good paying jobs. other things we brought in to in cities like cleveland is that people who have those great jobs now find themselves in jobs making a minimum wage or less than $10 an hour and they simply cannot pay their mortgages, make a car payment, but their kids in college. they are worried about whether or not these scholarship programs that the republicans have cut so horribly in my state of north carolina will be there for their kids. if you do not have access to capital, and most of us do not in this horrible credit
situation, largely because they are holding so much in reserve, so the only other approach that you can have to break through this access the public indication, the republican party seems to be committed to tearing down public dedication and privatizing as much as possible through various plans. this has to stopping the public education is the cornerstone of american prosperity. the caller's point is an excellent one, but like so many other aspects of a political discussion, there are many ripples that go out in the pond when you throw in that stock. host: what is the breakdown in your state of republican, democratic, and independent voters? guest: we are about 33% each. but we have voter registration here and democrats still have a plurality against republicans. in the third plantce would be
independt. in a straight ticket voting, democrats to vote more than republicans. the independent voters are critically important. the republican party old, the republican party of abraham lincoln is no more. the republican party in north carolina is the republican party of jesse helms. there are jesse helms the disciples that have completely infiltrated a party that was doing good work at one time in this country. the state of the republican party has become a party of the people like the koch brothers, whose father was on the board of a john bircher. i believe strongly that barack obama will carry north carolina
again and it will be a bellwether for this entire country. i am looking forward to the reelection of barack obama as president. host: even though his approval rating is out 43% for his job approval so far? guest: the election is still 13-14 months away. if you look at the jobless ratings for bill clinton at this time in his first term, i think you see several patterns. do not quote me on that, but i think you will see that. this economic recovery is not coming along as quickly as we would like to. we have had a republican do nothing congress and until congress starts doing stuff, people will blame the president. that is why this congress is doing nothing. they're putting politics over the economy. we have a call from cleveland
ohio whose friends it is on unemployment and the caller from winston-salem who sees people out of work milling about, they need to call their congressman and tell them they have to vote for this jobs act and they need to do it now. we cannot wait. but the economy over politics. politics will come and go, but this is having a devastating and long-term implications for the people who find themselves out of work or grossly under- employed. host: last call from santa barbara, calif., on our democratic line. caller: good morning. i'm really concerned with the the way this country is going. i feel it is nothing more than a crude attempt by the republican party to disarm all the things that have been put in place to recant the republican party. i also feel the immigration
policy in this country is no more than an invasion of our sovereignty. i will cross over and vote for governor romney if he has any politics to get the immigrants out of here. thank you for your time. host: final thoughts, mr. parker? guest: the immigration problems complex. in california and all the states in the southwest and pacific, it is a complex problem and one that is a distraction, unfortunately. whether it is important politically are not, the most important issue is putting people back to work. we have to pass this jobs that. we have to pass it right away. we're going to be talking about the need for jobs in this
country. i hope that we're still not talking about this in september 2012 when the country is keyed in on charlotte, n.c., because i hope we have already passed the jobs out by then and have done something. the republican congress is doing nothing. we do get distracted by these issues. i'm not saying they're not important. emigration is an important issue. it is more important to get the economy going and getting people back to work. stimulate demand, putting teachers back into the classroom, putting cops back on the beat, putting firefighters in the houses to protect us is of critically important. rebuilding our infrastructure. we have not talked about that. it is a boring topic. no one cares as long as they are driving safely, but when a bridge shake strothers a
structure of problem are you cannot cross over the ohio river into ohio from kentucky, it becomes an issue. we have to rebuild its infrastructure and we have to do it right away. host: david parker is the chairman of the north carolina democratic party. thank you for your time today. this week just came over our feet and it highlights what we are talking about maroc, specifically looking at third- party candidates. elliott ackerman with a new effort called americans elect talking about third-party candidates and getting them ballot access. you can see that tomorrow on "washington journal" as he has conveniently set up. that will be at 7:45 to want to learn about their role in the process. in our last segment, we will take a look at genetically modified food, what is, how it works, and what regulation it comes under. our guest is a former adviser to
secretary clinton. we will have that when we come back >> in my opinion, the bounds of academic freedom have been pushed too far. >> suggesting that the job for life mentality needs to go. >> there are professors of the cooking, professors of nutritional studies who now have tenure. when pressed, someone joining the party line will say that we need some of have tenure in a security study so they can talk about immigration even though it is controversial. and then someone in nutritional
studies needs to say something controversial about obesity. >> back and other reasons why you will not get the college paid for sunday night on c- span's "q&a." >> watch live coverage of the national book festival with highlights on black america, abraham lincoln and slavery, and on african-american migration north and west. one sunday, douglas wallace on wild bill donovan, woodrow wilson's first ladies, and on the greater journey on americans in paris. look for the entire book festival schedule including call-in olli's act -- call-in's at booktv.org. >> they have agreed to remove the question regarding one's sexual orientation from the greater than application and will not be asked in the interim.
>> marking the end of don't ask, don't tell and that more than 14,000 discharged service members can apply for reinstatement. follow the history online through the archives at the c- span video library. >> this c-span networks providing coverage of politics, public affairs, nonfiction books, and american history. but for congress to continue federal spending until november. keep tabs on the deficit committee as they formulate a plan to lower the debt. all the presidential candidates as they campaigned across the country. all available on television, radio come on line, and on social media websites. search any time with the c-span video library. we are on the road with the local content vehicles. showing events around the country, washington, your way.
the c-span networks. created by cable and provided as a public service. "washington journal" continues. host: a professor of penn state university and has done some teach york and a former cy technology adviser to president clinton. we're talking of genetically modified food. what does that mean? guest: today, it means plants that were modified by a molecular technique. it is an odd designation because all of our food is genetically modified, but that is what it means today. host: can give us an example of how this is modified? guest: the most widely used example is corn. it has an extra gene added in that protect it from insects.
it came from a bacterium that has toxic insect larva , but it is not toxic to people or the animals. host: what causes an entity to want to modify it the food in that way? guest: the basic reason that we're using such techniques is that we can do things and we could not do before. i can give you a real-life example. a colleague of mine in england, jonathan jones, has warned us about the genes that protect potatoes. he has been able to take a gene from a potato and brought it into this one that makes a great
chips. most people have a vaguely heard of the irish potato famine that killed 1 million people and drove 1 million people to emigrate. that was caused by this particular on this -- fungus and it can really wipe out the plant. today, they get sprayed 10-15 times with an insecticide. imagine you could protect it. it is like inoculating are vaccinating a person. you are essentially making the plant resistant. you build it in. it is amazing. people here that and they get scared. -- hear that and get scared. the e.u. has a lot of resistance and have spent upwards of 300 million euros over 25 years looking for problems, investigating this
issue. but the conclusion is that these techniques are no more dangerous than anything used before. in the 20th-century we use radiation and chemicals to accelerate the mutation. a mutation is just a genetic change. we have been doing a lot of genetic modification. because we have been so successful and agriculture has become so suspicions -- so sufficient, nobody knows what it takes to get all that food to the table. host: is a regulated market from the united states standpoint? guest: genetically modified foods are heavily regulated which was a burden that was created 25 years ago when we did not know very much. it has to stop. today, it costs upwards of $10- $20 million to bring one crop.
all these big biotech companies and big crops can support that which is why we only have a few genetically modified crops and they are all produced by a biotech company. we do not have a mechanism to save we have learned a lot over 25 years and nothing dangerous has surfaced. all the things we have not anticipated have been positive. for example, the genetically modified corn does not let the insects in and they bring in fungi that make toxic chemicals which is a problem and that problem is essentially gone. host: we're talking about the genetic modification of food. if you would like to call in olli -- the numbers are on your screen. us aoyou want to send
tweet, #cspanwj. email to email@example.com. why does a gmo now grow reproductive seeds? guest: i think you're talking about the moniker of terminator technology. that never developed. that is an urban legend. all of our corn is a hybrid corn. that is an extraordinary phenomenon in itself were you take two plants come across them, and you have hybrid corn with a bigger ears and so forth. there is a lot that goes into rising which is the reason people do not keep these in
developed countries. host: the top modified food crops according to the usda and others, sugar beets, corn, cotton, and canola. it generally receives oversight through the usda come epa, and the fda. why three? guest: 25 years ago, the office of science and technology policy paul to get to those agencies, each of which had some regulatory per view in those areas and thought there was no evidence that these were particularly dangerous techniques. go find laws that you can regulate under these existing laws. so they did. that is the good news and the bad news. the result is that people who
want to bring something to market have to go to either two agencies or three. they regulate things that go into the environment that have pesticide properties, which is what they call them. the problem is that there is not any process by which we incorporate things that we have learned that advancing science can it be reflected in the easing of regulation. about was true in the early days, the first days of genetic engineering. there was just an oversight committee and its job was to look, analyze, and evaluate. it is there a danger or is there not? if it is not, stop regulating. that was short circuit it by the fact that they are regulating under existing laws. host: new york is first.
jeremy on the independent line. caller: good morning. i have a question for you, ms. fedoroff. as far as i'm understand common genetic modification is done by introducing genes by means of a virus. i am wondering if the virus persists in genetically modified foods? is there any risk of the virus itself changing to become differet? or does it die off once it is not carried on in the genome of a subsequent plan? guest: genetic modification is not done with the viruses. sometimes a little piece of a virus is used, but it is not
done with of viruses. it is done either directly with the dna, the genetic material, or with a bacteria that is an agro-bacterium that can transfer genetics. nature causes the disease, but they take away the diseased genes and use it as a way to introduce genes. the implants viruses all the time because they're very common in nature, but they do not infect people. host: why can they not get a label on a product that says "gmo?" guest: it is the fda that labels food and they only label when there is a reason to label. compositional or otherwise.
if it is not something that is a potential hazard to somebody, they do not label. host: what does the "o" stand for? guest: organism. "ge" is a term that is also used a lot, a genetically engineered. i think it is important to appreciate that we can change every single food that we grow. corn is a creation of human beings and it is all about genetic modification and most people do not know that. these are the best techniques we have ever devised to modify crops. people have compared how much damage is done or how much changes introduced into crop plants using these techniques compared to older techniques. the answer is there is much less change.
host: back to the phone. caller: i am going to main goal this name. one researcher found a link to pre-cancerous cells in rats and i knew she knew that was coming. genetically modified soon as cannot reproduce and it is leading to world property. poverty. i knew she knows all this. i do not know where she gets her money, but when someone is sued to keep their mouth shut about a potentially dangerous item, there's a problem. host: a lot of questions about monsanto's. how did they control them? guest: farmers can buy what ever
they want. the reason they migrate to these is because their costs go down. they can use less testified -- pesticides, can be more economically sound. they can do no-till farming. let me try to hit on some of the questions that the last caller asked. the individual she was talking about reported years ago that rats that genetically modified potatoes did not fare as well, not that they got sick and died, just that they did not fare as well. to cut to the chase, i spoke with some members of parliament when i was in england and they told me he had admitted that his data was not sound. the crux of the matter is that
his observations did not stand up to scrutiny. he announced them not during normal challenge -- channel of publication, but he just went on air which created an awful lot of bad press and we're still recovering from not. the other issue that she raised was the stuff called terminator technology. it was an idea of that was put together early on when people were concerned about the spread of genes from plants genetically modified from the new techniques and the idea was that what they would not spread. want to gut the moniker of "terminator" which was applied
by a canadian environment the group, it became a very topic and monsanto said it would not pursue it. host: republican line, my god, go ahead. caller: thank you foresees band. i have to ask you. how can we actually trust you and the government. you say the fda when monsanto and government employees have used a revolving door between the department of agriculture, someadministration's, and other administrations but you claim we should trust them whense there's no danger because of the relationship with
the government seems to influence whether or not they can make us think that there is not one. >> the reason that you should trust genetic modification is because it has been scrutinized more than any other crop that has ever been brought to market. we have analytical tools that we have never had before, companies that bring crops to market and whether it is monsanto, cengenta, etc., that the plant is what they started with and the gene that they are adding does not add anything toxic or allergenic. then they have to do a lot of field testing as well. we have never required? of any previous modification
technique. host: claremont, fla., your honor. -- you are on. caller: i want to reiterate what the new yorkers have said. it makes me extremely upset. all the foods you have put out our records i can along her -- no longer eat because they have the adverse effect on my body. i am sure they are not being honest about the rise of children's diseases. the fact that monsanto and all those other companies have gotten out to our government so that we, as consumers, cannot read the labels and choose not to eat this poisonous food. the food and drug administration is bought and paid for by these mega-two companies. i think it is outrageous that
she is up here trying to convince us that we should be these companies as guinea pigs. thank you very much and i will listen off air. guest: there is no evidence after the crops have been in production for 25 years and people eat genetically modified corn in many products and so far there are no documented cases. our food and drug administration is probably the best agency in the world for making sure that foods are safe. that does not mean it is perfect, but it is better. frankly, we have the safest. although people have stopped believing that, we have the safest food supply in the history of humanity.
host: large food companies do not have sway at the fda or other regulatory bodies? guest: not much. host: how would you defend that? guest: there are procedures. there are required data. the have to submit everything and people at the regulatory agencies have to examine it and make sure that the companies have been compliant. host: next call, waterbury, connecticut. go ahead. caller: i was a little confused at the beginning of this because i tune in a little late. sorry. sorry. ok.
i thought this had to do with meat and things like that. if you are just talking about the horticulture that has been going on for a long time, that has been tried. if you're talking about various cattle and the genetic engineering of that, i have two very simple questions. one, do you expect to label these and require labeling? two, do you expect it to mixed non-genetically engineered food with a genetically engineered food? if so, how are we going to handle this mess that we have here? thank you. guest: i would suggest it is not so much of a mass.
the question is if there is anything dangerous about the genetic modification that has been made. let me give you an example. i will draw from plants because there are more examples available for plants. there is a genetically modified papaya into which it fragment of agent -- a gene from a virus has been introduced which triggers an ability to recognize the virus. it is spread by insects. instead of replicating the virus, making more coming in damaging the papaya, it just destroyed the incoming viral genome. we love to be able to do that to protect people, but that has not progressed to that point. it is not even adding a protein.
it is a mechanism that exists in the plant cells. again, to go back to the issue of labeling, fda labels when there is a reason to label, and a reason can be composition, allergens, but the bottom line is that none of the contemporary genetically modified foods are different in terms of toxicity or allergy. that is part of getting to the market. this contrasts with older techniques. before these older techniques were introduced and this level of scrutiny, things would get to the markets that could make people sick.
there was no mechanism for detecting these food properties. today, we have that. food is now safer than it was before using holder techniques. host: this is a little technical. guest: it is a problem. what rod is referring to is and glycophate.lled it is more benign and it is one of the few that is paired with
an herbicide-tolerant plant. if you use any herbicide too much, you are selecting for more resistant weeds. the answer is not to eliminate the ability to use an herbicide because there are many, many benefits. using an herbicide come you can keep crop residue on the field. you do not lose soil. you have soil carbon. and the answer is to develop more herbicides so you do not use the same one two years in a row. i think they are coming up, but they are not out yet. host: on the independent line from hawaii. caller: ms. fedoroff, in the last few years, we have had
issues of gmo plants in hawaii. the natives are against it, but it is an oversimplification because this is a cultural issue. another is a move to where they might ask the state to do the labeling. i just want to ask a couple of quick questions. can gmo pollen draft on to organic farms? was this not one of the ways this was originally solved way back decades ago? guest: can colin drifted? -- pollen drift? it is carried by insects and it can be carried by wind. that is not a new problem. if a farmer plants sweet corn
and butter corn, he will get bader and sweet corn, but it does not drift. pollen is very confined to particular crops. corn pollen does not effect or pollinate other types of crops like cabbage, beans, or what ever else you grow. that is a familiar problem but is actually in the organic world. there are tolerances or small amounts of pollen contamination. the other question that you asked -- i forget. host: "the atlantic" put out a piece to ask for them to deal with pollen that drift. guest: the organic industry is very small and the amount of space, most of the pond, for
example, calls within 5 feet of the field. you do not need a big buffer not to have a problem. it did not succeed because that crop had been approved. there is no consequence for organic farmers. there's a small amount of contamination. it was a bit of a tempest in a teapot. host: houston, texas, good morning. caller: i was just calling in about these genetically modified the seeds come organisms, whenever. they are also developing weeds that the round-up does not kill, but it also affects the insects and then you have to get a whole different pesticide it to spray.
and then not only that, the weeds themselves tear up all the farm equipment. guest: i think already answered that. the roundup is a glycophate and the answer is using a different herbicides. they are developing new were herbicides. host: jones built from arkansas, is next. chris, are you there? -- jonesville, arkansas. caller: you're saying that there is no consequence with gmo crops. is the bt corn by monsanto not registered? if there's no reason to label or do anything, what about when we
start crossing animals with other animals? i believe china just announced they have started crossing to develop human milk. i would kind of like to know if the milk i am purchasing is human milk or something. guest: the second question has displaced the first question. all right. the first question was about pesticide registration. the original epa effort to regulate crops that were protected by insects, there were called pesticides. that was a very unfortunate label because they are not pesticides in the way that a chemical is a pesticide.
it is a gene that comes from a protein that was taken from a bacteria that organic farmers use. it is so innocuous that it has been separated from helicopters to protect gypsum of. it is a very benign gena. today, they call the plant-inc. protections, not pesticides and, because that gave the public the impression that it is this saying as a chemical pesticide. it replaces a toxic chemical with a benign protein. that is a very positive thing, i remind you. the labels matter. they have never quite lived down the original labeling of the pesticide.
the other question of human milk, cows are not exactly -- i'm not exactly sure what you mean, but efforts to create milk that has a composition that is more suitable for human beings than cows are probably under way. i do not know the details, but they are not crossing cows with people. if i understand correctly what you are referring to, efforts to modify the composition of the milk to be better for human babies. host: suzanne on our democratic line with nina federoff. suzanne, are you there? ok. republican line. kevin, good morning. caller: i think it should be a crime if they give us
genetically modified food and do not label it. it is my choice i want to read something that is not natural. you claim that there's no influence from the industry to the fda, then why is there a revolving door from the industry to the fda, fda to the industry? i think they should genetically modify politicians so they are not corrupt, if you think it is so great to genetically modify stuff. why can we not genetically modify these politicians? host: we will leave it there. guest: people have the idea that there was never any genetic modification. all of our foods, except for wild caught fish, truffles,
blueberries, they are all genetically modified. we have been busy genetically modifying foods 4 10,000 years. in the 20th-century, we used much cruder techniques than we use now. this method of genetic modification is more benign than any others that came before it. this is the tragedy of people's misunderstanding of what we're doing now. to force people to put people in jail for genetically modifying foods when what they're doing is improving and making them safer , and making genetic modifications that make it possible to use less chemicals, less toxic chemicals that are better for the environment, people have really set themselves against these techniques for no reason except that it is a change.
it is different in the ways of accomplishing and then that we have had for a very long time. the population pundits tell us that there will be a couple billion more people on the face of the year and we do not have any more farms left bank of the only choice with agriculture is to become more productive on the same amount of land that we have. the tragedy will be, if people are so dead set against using modern science that we have to go back to the techniques that we used it two centuries ago, we will not be able to keep up with the growing population. hungry people are very destructive people. the air of the spring began because the food prices were higher than they had ever been. that does not effect people in
rich countries, but it affects the poor everywhere come here as with everywhere. host: have any studies been made for the "nutrition density" of gmo vs. non-gmo? guest: the gmo foods on the markets they are absolutely identical. that is part of what they have to show, that have the crop have started with, at a single component, and it has to be shown that component is not- toxic and non-allergenic. they are exactly the same. host: westchester county, new york, you are next. caller: been morning, professor. my question is concerning the." live outbreaks -- the e coli outbreaks. we have cantaloupes coming in from mexico.
how do you explain the coli -- e coli outbreaks from lettuce, seedless grapes, and so on. guest: e coli is from people or animals. what people do not realize it, especially those whatever organic farming, is that people from using manure. we share pathogen's with our farm animals and many of those increasing fraction of the salmonella poisoning and e coli is coming in through organic waste. host: conn. good morning. caller: hello? you keep talking about corn, but
what about soybeans, canola, and others in the company is that make it so they can only buy in seed from them and so another farmer accidentally winds up with a genetically modified seeds in his crops? there was a famous case in canada of where the farmer -- guest: guest: percy? caller: and there are complaints about a genetic police going around to check out all of these deals so they had to get the feed from them. i think that is a more serious danger than the scientific process you are referring to. guest: